U.S. patent number 9,009,815 [Application Number 13/842,097] was granted by the patent office on 2015-04-14 for increasing chosen password strength.
This patent grant is currently assigned to International Business Machines Corporation. The grantee listed for this patent is International Business Machines Corporation. Invention is credited to Olgierd Stanislaw Pieczul, Mary Ellen Zurko.
United States Patent |
9,009,815 |
Pieczul , et al. |
April 14, 2015 |
Increasing chosen password strength
Abstract
An approach is provided to increase password strength in a group
of users. The approach detects a password event corresponding to
one of the users. In response to the detected password event, the
approach identifies a strength of the user's password and compares
it to one or more password strength metrics that correspond to the
group of users. The password strength comparison data is then
transmitted as feedback back to the user.
Inventors: |
Pieczul; Olgierd Stanislaw
(Dublin, IE), Zurko; Mary Ellen (Groton, MA) |
Applicant: |
Name |
City |
State |
Country |
Type |
International Business Machines Corporation |
Armonk |
NY |
US |
|
|
Assignee: |
International Business Machines
Corporation (Armonk, NY)
|
Family
ID: |
51535026 |
Appl.
No.: |
13/842,097 |
Filed: |
March 15, 2013 |
Prior Publication Data
|
|
|
|
Document
Identifier |
Publication Date |
|
US 20140282939 A1 |
Sep 18, 2014 |
|
Current U.S.
Class: |
726/18;
726/6 |
Current CPC
Class: |
H04L
9/0897 (20130101); H04L 9/3226 (20130101); H04L
9/3234 (20130101); G06F 21/46 (20130101); H04L
63/083 (20130101); H04L 63/20 (20130101); H04L
63/0846 (20130101); H04L 9/0891 (20130101); H04L
2209/26 (20130101); G06F 2221/2117 (20130101) |
Current International
Class: |
G06F
17/30 (20060101); H04L 29/06 (20060101); G06F
7/04 (20060101) |
Field of
Search: |
;726/6,18 |
References Cited
[Referenced By]
U.S. Patent Documents
Other References
Castelluccia, Claude, Markus Durmuth, and Daniele Perito. "Adaptive
Password-Strength Meters from Markov Models." NDSS. 2012. cited by
examiner .
Kelley, Patrick Gage, et al. "Guess again (and again and again):
Measuring password strength by simulating password-cracking
algorithms." Security and Privacy (SP), 2012 IEEE Symposium on.
IEEE, 2012. cited by examiner .
Ur, Blase, et al. "How Does Your Password Measure Up? The Effect of
Strength Meters on Password Creation." USENIX Security Symposium.
2012. cited by examiner.
|
Primary Examiner: Simitoski; Michael
Attorney, Agent or Firm: VanLeeuwen & VanLeeuwen LaBaw;
Jeffrey S.
Claims
What is claimed is:
1. A computer-implemented method to increase password strength in a
group of users, the method comprising: detecting a password event
corresponding to a first user belonging to the group of users; in
response to the detected password event, identifying one or more
password strength metrics of a first user password that corresponds
to the first user; comparing the one or more identified password
strength metrics to one or more password strength metrics for a set
of passwords, wherein respective passwords in the set of passwords
correspond to respective ones of the group of users, and wherein
the set of passwords and their respective password strength metrics
are stored in a storage area; transmitting feedback to the first
user, wherein the feedback is based on the password strength
comparison; and receiving a password update from the first user
that updates the first user password to a stronger password,
wherein the password update is received in response to the
transmitted feedback.
2. The method of claim 1, wherein the group of users is a group of
users on a social network.
3. The method of claim 1, wherein the password event is an event
selected from the group consisting of setting a new password,
changing a password, authenticating a user, password expiration,
and a password strength threshold.
4. The method of claim 1 further comprising: identifying one or
more password strength factors pertaining to the first user
password, wherein the feedback to the user includes the identified
password strength factors.
5. The method of claim 1 further comprising: tracking a count of a
number of times each unique password is used by the group of users,
wherein one of the password strength metrics is based on the count
of the associated password.
6. The method of claim 1 further comprising: identifying one or
more password rules; comparing the first user password to the
identified password rules; rejecting the first user password in
response to the comparison revealing that the first user password
violates at least one of the identified password rules; and
accepting the first user password in response to the comparison
revealing that the first user password complies with the identified
password rules.
7. The method of claim 1 wherein the password strength metrics are
selected from the group consisting of a password strength value, a
password age, and a count of times a password is used by the group
of users.
8. An information handling system comprising: one or more
processors; a memory coupled to at least one of the processors; a
set of instructions stored in the memory and executed by at least
one of the processors to increase password strength, wherein the
set of instructions perform actions of: detecting a password event
corresponding to a first user belonging to a group of users; in
response to the detected password event, identifying one or more
password strength metrics of a first user password that corresponds
to the first user; comparing the one or more identified password
strength metrics to one or more password strength metrics for a set
of passwords, wherein respective passwords in the set of passwords
correspond to respective ones of the group of users, and wherein
the set of passwords and their respective password strength metrics
are stored in a storage area; transmitting feedback to the first
user, wherein the feedback is based on the password strength
comparison; and receiving a password update from the first user
that updates the first user password to a stronger password,
wherein the password update is received in response to the
transmitted feedback.
9. The information handling system of claim 8, wherein the password
event is an event selected from the group consisting of setting a
new password, changing a password, authenticating a user, password
expiration, and a password strength threshold.
10. The information handling system of claim 8 wherein the actions
further comprise: identifying one or more password strength factors
pertaining to the first user password, wherein the feedback to the
user includes the identified password strength factors.
11. The information handling system of claim 8 wherein the actions
further comprise: tracking a count of a number of times each unique
password is used by the group of users, wherein one of the password
strength metrics is based on the count of the associated
password.
12. The information handling system of claim 8 wherein the actions
further comprise: identifying one or more password rules; comparing
the first user password to the identified password rules; rejecting
the first user password in response to the comparison revealing
that the first user password violates at least one of the
identified password rules; and accepting the first user password in
response to the comparison revealing that the first user password
complies with the identified password rules.
13. The information handling system of claim 8 wherein the password
strength metrics are selected from the group consisting of a
password strength value, a password age, and a count of times a
password is used by the group of users.
14. A computer program product stored in a computer readable
storage device, comprising computer instructions that, when
executed by an information handling system, causes the information
handling system to increase password strength in a group of users
by performing actions comprising: detecting a password event
corresponding to a first user belonging to the group of users; in
response to the detected password event, identifying one or more
password strength metrics of a first user password that corresponds
to the first user; comparing the one or more identified password
strength metrics to one or more password strength metrics for a set
of passwords, wherein respective passwords in the set of passwords
correspond to respective ones of the group of users, and wherein
the set of passwords and their respective password strength metrics
are stored in a storage area; transmitting feedback to the first
user, wherein the feedback is based on the password strength
comparison; and receiving a password update from the first user
that updates the first user password to a stronger password,
wherein the password update is received in response to the
transmitted feedback.
15. The computer program product of claim 14, wherein the group of
users is a group of users on a social network.
16. The computer program product of claim 14, wherein the password
event is an event selected from the group consisting of setting a
new password, changing a password, authenticating a user, password
expiration, and a password strength threshold.
17. The computer program product of claim 14 wherein the actions
further comprise: identifying one or more password strength factors
pertaining to the first user password, wherein the feedback to the
user includes the identified password strength factors.
18. The computer program product of claim 14 wherein the actions
further comprise: tracking a count of a number of times each unique
password is used by the group of users, wherein one of the password
strength metrics is based on the count of the associated
password.
19. he computer program product of claim 14 wherein the actions
further comprise: identifying one or more password rules; comparing
the first user password to the identified password rules; rejecting
the first user password in response to the comparison revealing
that the first user password violates at least one of the
identified password rules; and accepting the first user password in
response to the comparison revealing that the first user password
complies with the identified password rules.
20. The computer program product of claim 14 wherein the password
strength metrics are selected from the group consisting of a
password strength value, a password age, and a count of times a
password is used by the group of users.
Description
TECHNICAL FIELD
The present disclosure relates to an approach that provides
community-based password strength feedback to users.
BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION
Much user authentication in traditional systems relies on
user-chosen passwords. The strength of a password in the face of a
variety of attacks, from brute force to knowledge-based attacks,
continues to be important to prevent unauthorized access of a user
account or user data. Techniques that influence users in the
strength of their chosen password include enforced password
composition policy, lists of banned passwords, feedback on the
strength of the password the user is choosing, and providing lists
of generated (high-strength) passwords from which the user chooses
a password. Most traditional mechanisms rely on restricting users.
The feedback on the user's current password strength gives users
some transparency into the strength of the choice they are
currently making when compared to an algorithm for evaluating the
strength of a password against brute force attacks, with the notion
that they will chose to get their password to strong (or at least
not weak). However, such feedback does not include context of the
user community in which the password is used.
SUMMARY
An approach is provided to increase password strength in a group of
users. The approach detects a password event corresponding to one
of the users. In response to the detected password event, the
approach identifies a strength of the user's password and compares
it to one or more password strength metrics that correspond to the
group of users. The password strength comparison data is then
transmitted as feedback back to the user.
The foregoing is a summary and thus contains, by necessity,
simplifications, generalizations, and omissions of detail;
consequently, those skilled in the art will appreciate that the
summary is illustrative only and is not intended to be in any way
limiting. Other aspects, inventive features, and advantages of the
present invention, as defined solely by the claims, will become
apparent in the non-limiting detailed description set forth
below.
BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS
The present invention may be better understood, and its numerous
objects, features, and advantages made apparent to those skilled in
the art by referencing the accompanying drawings, wherein:
FIG. 1 is a block diagram of a data processing system in which the
methods described herein can be implemented;
FIG. 2 provides an extension of the information handling system
environment shown in FIG. 1 to illustrate that the methods
described herein can be performed on a wide variety of information
handling systems which operate in a networked environment;
FIG. 3 is a component diagram that depicts a system that increases
user password strength based on community-based data;
FIG. 4 is a depiction of a flowchart showing a login process that
utilizes community-based data to increase password strength;
FIG. 5 is a depiction of a flowchart showing the logic used gather
the community-based data metrics; and
FIG. 6 is a depiction of a flowchart showing the logic used update
a user's password utilizing the gathered community-based data
metric to increase password strength.
DETAILED DESCRIPTION
As will be appreciated by one skilled in the art, aspects of the
present invention may be embodied as a system, method or computer
program product. Accordingly, aspects of the present invention may
take the form of an entirely hardware embodiment, an entirely
software embodiment (including firmware, resident software,
micro-code, etc.) or an embodiment combining software and hardware
aspects that may all generally be referred to herein as a
"circuit," "module" or "system." Furthermore, aspects of the
present invention may take the form of a computer program product
embodied in one or more computer readable medium(s) having computer
readable program code embodied thereon.
Any combination of one or more computer readable medium(s) may be
utilized. The computer readable medium may be a computer readable
signal medium or a computer readable storage medium. A computer
readable storage medium may be, for example, but not limited to, an
electronic, magnetic, optical, electromagnetic, infrared, or
semiconductor system, apparatus, or device, or any suitable
combination of the foregoing. More specific examples (a
non-exhaustive list) of the computer readable storage medium would
include the following: an electrical connection having one or more
wires, a portable computer diskette, a hard disk, a random access
memory (RAM), a read-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable
read-only memory (EPROM or Flash memory), an optical fiber, a
portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), an optical storage
device, a magnetic storage device, or any suitable combination of
the foregoing. In the context of this document, a computer readable
storage medium may be any tangible medium that can contain, or
store a program for use by or in connection with an instruction
execution system, apparatus, or device.
A computer readable signal medium may include a propagated data
signal with computer readable program code embodied therein, for
example, in baseband or as part of a carrier wave. Such a
propagated signal may take any of a variety of forms, including,
but not limited to, electro-magnetic, optical, or any suitable
combination thereof. A computer readable signal medium may be any
computer readable medium that is not a computer readable storage
medium and that can communicate, propagate, or transport a program
for use by or in connection with an instruction execution system,
apparatus, or device.
Program code embodied on a computer readable medium may be
transmitted using any appropriate medium, including but not limited
to wireless, wireline, optical fiber cable, RF, etc., or any
suitable combination of the foregoing.
Computer program code for carrying out operations for aspects of
the present invention may be written in any combination of one or
more programming languages, including an object oriented
programming language such as Java, Smalltalk, C++ or the like and
conventional procedural programming languages, such as the "C"
programming language or similar programming languages. The program
code may execute entirely on the user's computer, partly on the
user's computer, as a stand-alone software package, partly on the
user's computer and partly on a remote computer or entirely on the
remote computer or server. In the latter scenario, the remote
computer may be connected to the user's computer through any type
of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide area
network (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external
computer (for example, through the Internet using an Internet
Service Provider).
Aspects of the present invention are described below with reference
to flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods,
apparatus (systems) and computer program products according to
embodiments of the invention. It will be understood that each block
of the flowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, and
combinations of blocks in the flowchart illustrations and/or block
diagrams, can be implemented by computer program instructions.
These computer program instructions may be provided to a processor
of a general purpose computer, special purpose computer, or other
programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, such
that the instructions, which execute via the processor of the
computer or other programmable data processing apparatus, create
means for implementing the functions/acts specified in the
flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
These computer program instructions may also be stored in a
computer readable medium that can direct a computer, other
programmable data processing apparatus, or other devices to
function in a particular manner, such that the instructions stored
in the computer readable medium produce an article of manufacture
including instructions which implement the function/act specified
in the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
The computer program instructions may also be loaded onto a
computer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other
devices to cause a series of operational steps to be performed on
the computer, other programmable apparatus or other devices to
produce a computer implemented process such that the instructions
which execute on the computer or other programmable apparatus
provide processes for implementing the functions/acts specified in
the flowchart and/or block diagram block or blocks.
FIG. 1 illustrates information handling system 100, which is a
simplified example of a computer system capable of performing the
computing operations described herein. Information handling system
100 includes one or more processors 110 coupled to processor
interface bus 112. Processor interface bus 112 connects processors
110 to Northbridge 115, which is also known as the Memory
Controller Hub (MCH). Northbridge 115 connects to system memory 120
and provides a means for processor(s) 110 to access the system
memory. Graphics controller 125 also connects to Northbridge 115.
In one embodiment, PCI Express bus 118 connects Northbridge 115 to
graphics controller 125. Graphics controller 125 connects to
display device 130, such as a computer monitor.
Northbridge 115 and Southbridge 135 connect to each other using bus
119. In one embodiment, the bus is a Direct Media Interface (DMI)
bus that transfers data at high speeds in each direction between
Northbridge 115 and Southbridge 135. In another embodiment, a
Peripheral Component Interconnect (PCI) bus connects the
Northbridge and the Southbridge. Southbridge 135, also known as the
I/O Controller Hub (ICH) is a chip that generally implements
capabilities that operate at slower speeds than the capabilities
provided by the Northbridge. Southbridge 135 typically provides
various busses used to connect various components. These busses
include, for example, PCI and PCI Express busses, an ISA bus, a
System Management Bus (SMBus or SMB), and/or a Low Pin Count (LPC)
bus. The LPC bus often connects low-bandwidth devices, such as boot
ROM 196 and "legacy" I/O devices (using a "super I/O" chip). The
"legacy" I/O devices (198) can include, for example, serial and
parallel ports, keyboard, mouse, and/or a floppy disk controller.
The LPC bus also connects Southbridge 135 to Trusted Platform
Module (TPM) 195. Other components often included in Southbridge
135 include a Direct Memory Access (DMA) controller, a Programmable
Interrupt Controller (PIC), and a storage device controller, which
connects Southbridge 135 to nonvolatile storage device 185, such as
a hard disk drive, using bus 184.
ExpressCard 155 is a slot that connects hot-pluggable devices to
the information handling system. ExpressCard 155 supports both PCI
Express and USB connectivity as it connects to Southbridge 135
using both the Universal Serial Bus (USB) the PCI Express bus.
Southbridge 135 includes USB Controller 140 that provides USB
connectivity to devices that connect to the USB. These devices
include webcam (camera) 150, infrared (IR) receiver 148, keyboard
and trackpad 144, and Bluetooth device 146, which provides for
wireless personal area networks (PANs). USB Controller 140 also
provides USB connectivity to other miscellaneous USB connected
devices 142, such as a mouse, removable nonvolatile storage device
145, modems, network cards, ISDN connectors, fax, printers, USB
hubs, and many other types of USB connected devices. While
removable nonvolatile storage device 145 is shown as a
USB-connected device, removable nonvolatile storage device 145
could be connected using a different interface, such as a Firewire
interface, etcetera.
Wireless Local Area Network (LAN) device 175 connects to
Southbridge 135 via the PCI or PCI Express bus 172. LAN device 175
typically implements one of the IEEE 0.802.11 standards of
over-the-air modulation techniques that all use the same protocol
to wireless communicate between information handling system 100 and
another computer system or device. Optical storage device 190
connects to Southbridge 135 using Serial ATA (SATA) bus 188. Serial
ATA adapters and devices communicate over a high-speed serial link.
The Serial ATA bus also connects Southbridge 135 to other forms of
storage devices, such as hard disk drives. Audio circuitry 160,
such as a sound card, connects to Southbridge 135 via bus 158.
Audio circuitry 160 also provides functionality such as audio
line-in and optical digital audio in port 162, optical digital
output and headphone jack 164, internal speakers 166, and internal
microphone 168. Ethernet controller 170 connects to Southbridge 135
using a bus, such as the PCI or PCI Express bus. Ethernet
controller 170 connects information handling system 100 to a
computer network, such as a Local Area Network (LAN), the Internet,
and other public and private computer networks.
While FIG. 1 shows one information handling system, an information
handling system may take many forms. For example, an information
handling system may take the form of a desktop, server, portable,
laptop, notebook, or other form factor computer or data processing
system. In addition, an information handling system may take other
form factors such as a personal digital assistant (PDA), a gaming
device, ATM machine, a portable telephone device, a communication
device or other devices that include a processor and memory.
The Trusted Platform Module (TPM 195) shown in FIG. 1 and described
herein to provide security functions is but one example of a
hardware security module (HSM). Therefore, the TPM described and
claimed herein includes any type of HSM including, but not limited
to, hardware security devices that conform to the Trusted Computing
Groups (TCG) standard, and entitled "Trusted Platform Module (TPM)
Specification Version 1.2." The TPM is a hardware security
subsystem that may be incorporated into any number of information
handling systems, such as those outlined in FIG. 2.
FIG. 2 provides an extension of the information handling system
environment shown in FIG. 1 to illustrate that the methods
described herein can be performed on a wide variety of information
handling systems that operate in a networked environment. Types of
information handling systems range from small handheld devices,
such as handheld computer/mobile telephone 210 to large mainframe
systems, such as mainframe computer 270. Examples of handheld
computer 210 include personal digital assistants (PDAs), personal
entertainment devices, such as MP3 players, portable televisions,
and compact disc players. Other examples of information handling
systems include pen, or tablet, computer 220, laptop, or notebook,
computer 230, workstation 240, personal computer system 250, and
server 260. Other types of information handling systems that are
not individually shown in FIG. 2 are represented by information
handling system 280. As shown, the various information handling
systems can be networked together using computer network 200. Types
of computer network that can be used to interconnect the various
information handling systems include Local Area Networks (LANs),
Wireless Local Area Networks (WLANs), the Internet, the Public
Switched Telephone Network (PSTN), other wireless networks, and any
other network topology that can be used to interconnect the
information handling systems. Many of the information handling
systems include nonvolatile data stores, such as hard drives and/or
nonvolatile memory. Some of the information handling systems shown
in FIG. 2 depicts separate nonvolatile data stores (server 260
utilizes nonvolatile data store 265, mainframe computer 270
utilizes nonvolatile data store 275, and information handling
system 280 utilizes nonvolatile data store 285). The nonvolatile
data store can be a component that is external to the various
information handling systems or can be internal to one of the
information handling systems. In addition, removable nonvolatile
storage device 145 can be shared among two or more information
handling systems using various techniques, such as connecting the
removable nonvolatile storage device 145 to a USB port or other
connector of the information handling systems.
FIGS. 3-6 depict an approach that can be executed on an information
handling system and computer network as shown in FIGS. 1-2. In this
approach, community-based password metrics, such as strength of
other passwords used by community members, age of passwords used by
community members, etc. are compared to the user's password to
ascertain how the user's password measures up to the passwords used
by other members of the community, such as a social network, etc.
This feedback is provided to the user without revealing any actual
password data that pertains to other community members that might
be used to access other users' accounts. This approach extends the
space of mechanisms that inspire users to choose stronger
passwords, by using information about passwords chosen by other
members of the group (both currently and historically) to influence
users to want to choose stronger/better passwords, for personal or
communal reasons.
FIG. 3 is a component diagram that depicts a system that increases
user password strength based on community-based data. User
community 300, such as a social network, business, organization, or
other user community includes a number of users, shown as User 1,
User 2, User 3, and User n. Users in the user community generate
various password events, such as when logging onto system 310
(authenticating the user), when setting a new password, when
changing a password, when the password expires, and when the
password strength of the user's password falls below a given
threshold.
System 310, such as a social network, a business' computer system,
an organization's computer system, and the like, includes password
management component 320 which is a set of processes used to
authenticate users to the system as well as manage user passwords.
Password management component 320 utilizes password rules 340 to
ascertain whether a password chosen by a user is acceptable. For
example, the password rules may dictate that a password must have a
certain number of characters, that a given number of the characters
must be numeric, that a given number of characters must be capital,
and that the password cannot be common words (such as "password,"
etc.). Password management component 320 maintains password data
350 which includes various password attributes, such as the
password that is used to authenticate each of the users to the
system, a password strength value corresponding to each of the
passwords, a password age (or datestamp) indicating how long the
password has been in use, and any number of other password
attributes.
In addition, password management 320 identifies community password
metrics (data store 360), such as the strength value of passwords
used by community members, the ages of passwords used by community
members, and the like. Community password metrics are identified by
analyzing password data 350. Further, password management 320
computes a number of community password statistics (data store 370)
based on the community password metrics. For example, community
password statistics could include the average password strength
value of community passwords as well as other statistical
breakdowns of the password strength values (e.g., top ten percent,
top quartile, lower quartile, lower ten percent, etc.), and average
age of passwords as well as other statistical breakdowns of the
password age values (e.g., top ten percent, top quartile, lower
quartile, lower ten percent, etc.). These statistical values are
used to provide password feedback. For example, the feedback might
inform the user that the user's password falls in the lowest ten
percent and that the age of the user's password is in the lower
half. These statistical values might also be used as password rules
to compel a user to change a password when the user's password
attributes falls below acceptable community password
statistics.
Password management component 320 authenticates the users to system
310. After being authenticated, the users can perform system
functions 380, such as utilizing social media
applications/functions in a social media environment, accessing
business/organizational applications, etc.
FIG. 4 is a depiction of a flowchart showing a login process that
utilizes community-based data to increase password strength.
Processing commences at 400 whereupon, at step 410, a login request
is received by a user that is a member of user community 300. As
previously discussed, user community 300 is a group of users, such
as the users of a social network, users in a business or
organization, etc. To logon to the system, the user provides the
system with a user identifier (userid) and a password. At step 420,
the system authenticates the provided user identifier and password
by retrieving the user identifier and the expected password from
data store 350. A determination is made as to whether the user is
authenticated (decision 430). This determination is made based on
whether the entered user identifier is found in data store 350 as
well as whether the password provided by the user matches the
expected password stored in data store 350. If the user is not
authenticated (wrong user identifier and/or password provided by
the user), then decision 430 branches to the "no" branch whereupon,
at step 435, an error is sent to the user informing the user that
the user identifier and/or password was not successfully
authenticated. On the other hand, if the user is authenticated (a
valid user identifier was provided and the password provided
matched the expected password), then decision 430 branches to the
"yes" branch to perform additional system access steps.
At step 440, the process compares the provided password, attributes
(e.g., age, etc.) and community password statistics (from community
password statistics data store 370) to any applicable password
rules from rules data store 340. For example, a rule could be that
passwords must be updated every ninety days or that a user's
password needs to be updated when it is among the lowest of the
community in terms of password strength. In this regard, one of the
password attributes is a password strength that is calculated using
one or more password strength attributes. In one embodiment, the
password strength is previously determined (e.g., using a
background process or at the time the password is updated) and this
strength data is retained as an attribute in password data 350. So,
at step 440 the process compares the identified strength of the
user's password to one or more password strength metrics that
correspond to the group of users. A determination is made as to
whether the user's password is compliant with the password rules
currently in place for the user community (decision 450).
If the user's password is compliant with the password rules
currently in place for the user community, then decision 450
branches to the "yes" branch whereupon, at step 460, feedback is
prepared and transmitted back to the user with the feedback being
based on the comparison of the user's password attributes to the
password attributes of the user community that was performed in
step 440. The strength of the user's password in comparison to the
password strength of the user community, as found in community
password statistics data store 370, is provided to the user in this
feedback. For example, the feedback may inform the user as to which
quartile the user's password belongs in terms of strength as
compared with the group of users in the user community (e.g., falls
in top quartile, bottom quartile, etc.). Further and more detailed
comparison data may also be provided. A determination is made as to
whether the user wishes to update the password (decision 470), with
the decision possibly based on the feedback that was provided to
the user in step 460. If the user does not request to change the
password, then decision 470 branches to the "no" branch whereupon
the login process ends at 475 and the user is able to utilize the
system (e.g., social network Web application, business application,
etc.). If the user requests to change the password (with decision
470 branching to the "yes" branch) or if the user's password is not
compliant with the password rules (with decision 450 branching to
the "no" branch), then at predefined process 480, the user's
password is updated using an update process that utilizes
community-based password data (see FIG. 6 and corresponding text
for further processing details). Login processing thereafter ends
at 495.
FIG. 5 is a depiction of a flowchart showing the logic used gather
the community-based data metrics. Processing commences at 500. In
one embodiment the process is a background process or otherwise
performed when system resources are underutilized on an a separate
system than the system that performs the main system functions so
that system performance is not overly impacted. In the process, the
data pertaining to each user is selected and metrics are computed.
The resulting metrics are used to calculate community password
metrics (data store 360). After the community password metrics are
calculated, the metrics are used in a statistical analysis that
results in community password statistics (data store 370).
At step 510 the data pertaining to the first user is selected from
password data store 350. At step 520, the first metric that is
being computed for each of the users is selected from metric list
(data store 530). At step 540, the process computes the selected
metric for the selected user (e.g., computing the password age of
the password currently set for the selected user, computing the
password strength of the password currently set for the selected
user, etc.). At step 550, the computed metric is stored as a
password attribute in the user's password data record (e.g.,
updating the password age, the password strength, etc.). In one
embodiment, the metrics are performed when the password has changed
especially if the metric values are types of values that do not
change over time, thus preventing the password strength value from
being repeatedly recalculated even though the password has not
changed. At step 560, the computed metric is added to the community
metrics that correspond to the group of users (data store 360). A
determination is made as to whether there are additional metrics to
select and calculate (decision 570). If there are additional
metrics to select and calculate, then decision 570 branches to the
"yes" branch which loops back to select and process the next metric
for the selected user. This looping continues until all of the
metrics that need to be calculated/updated have been selected and
computed, at which point decision 570 branches to the "no" branch.
A determination is made as to whether there are additional users in
the group of users that comprise the user community that need to be
selected and processed as described above (decision 575). If there
are additional users to select and process, then decision 575
branches to the "yes" branch which loops back to select the
password data corresponding to the next user and select/calculate
the metrics for the newly selected user. This looping continues
until all of the users have been selected and processed, at which
point decision 575 branches to the "no" branch for further
background processing.
After the community password metrics have been collected in data
store 360, the process uses the password metrics to perform
statistical analysis. At step 580, the first community metric
(e.g., password strength, password age, etc.) is selected from data
store 360. At step 585, the process performs a statistical analysis
on the selected community metric and saves the resulting
statistical analysis in data store 370. For example, analysis of
the password strength metric will indicate the values that fall in
the top ten percent, top quartile, bottom quartile, bottom ten
percent, etc. A determination is made as to whether there are more
community password metrics to analyze (decision 590). If there are
additional community password metrics to analyze, then decision 590
branches to the "yes" branch which loops back to select and
statistically analyze the next community metric. This looping
continues until all of the password metrics have been selected and
analyzed, at which point decision 590 branches to the "no" branch
whereupon the process waits for the next time at which community
metrics are computed (e.g., nightly, weekly, etc.). When the next
time arrives, processing loops back to the beginning of the process
(step 510) to perform the process and re-compute the metrics and
generate updated community password statistics.
FIG. 6 is a depiction of a flowchart showing the logic used update
a user's password utilizing the gathered community-based data
metric to increase password strength. The password update process
commences at 600 whereupon, at step 610, the process receives a
password update request from a user that is a member of user
community 300. The password update request includes the new updated
password that the user would like to have as the user's password.
At step 620, the process retrieves the user's password attributes,
such as a list of previous passwords used by the user, from
password data store 350. At step 625, the process compares the
password that is being requested by the user, the attributes of the
requested password (e.g., number of times this password has been
used, the strength of the password, etc.) as well as community
statistics (e.g., number of times this password has been used by
other members of the community, the strength of passwords used by
other members of the community, etc.) to password rules that are in
place for the user community (from data store 340). A determination
is made as to whether the new password that is being requested by
the user is in compliance with the password rules (decision 630).
If the new password is not in compliance with the password rules,
then decision 630 branches to the "no" branch whereupon, at step
640, an error is returned to the user and the new password is
rejected. On the other hand, if the new password is in compliance
with the password rules, then decision 630 branches to the "yes"
branch in order to perform further password update processing.
At step 650, the new password that is being requested is compared
to the current community password statistics from data store 370
and the comparison data is stored in memory 660. The password
strength of the new password is computed and this strength value is
compared to the strength of passwords currently being used by the
group of users in the user community. At step 670, the comparison
data is included in feedback that is transmitted back to the user.
In addition, the feedback prompts the user as to whether, based on
the feedback, the user still wants to use the new password. At step
675, a response to the prompt is received from the user. A
determination is made as to whether the user wishes to use the new
password after receiving the feedback (decision 680). If the
response from the user is to use the new password, then decision
680 branches to the "yes" branch whereupon, at step 690, the user's
password record in password data store 350 is updated with the new
password. In addition, in one embodiment the user's old (replaced)
password is retained as an attribute as a previously used password.
On the other hand, if the response from the user is to not use the
new password, then decision 680 branches to the "no" branch
bypassing step 690. The password update routine thereafter ends at
695.
The flowchart and block diagrams in the Figures illustrate the
architecture, functionality, and operation of possible
implementations of systems, methods and computer program products
according to various embodiments of the present invention. In this
regard, each block in the flowchart or block diagrams may represent
a module, segment, or portion of code, which comprises one or more
executable instructions for implementing the specified logical
function(s). It should also be noted that, in some alternative
implementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of
the order noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in
succession may, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or
the blocks may sometimes be executed in the reverse order,
depending upon the functionality involved. It will also be noted
that each block of the block diagrams and/or flowchart
illustration, and combinations of blocks in the block diagrams
and/or flowchart illustration, can be implemented by special
purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specified functions
or acts, or combinations of special purpose hardware and computer
instructions.
While particular embodiments of the present invention have been
shown and described, it will be obvious to those skilled in the art
that, based upon the teachings herein, that changes and
modifications may be made without departing from this invention and
its broader aspects. Therefore, the appended claims are to
encompass within their scope all such changes and modifications as
are within the true spirit and scope of this invention.
Furthermore, it is to be understood that the invention is solely
defined by the appended claims. It will be understood by those with
skill in the art that if a specific number of an introduced claim
element is intended, such intent will be explicitly recited in the
claim, and in the absence of such recitation no such limitation is
present. For non-limiting example, as an aid to understanding, the
following appended claims contain usage of the introductory phrases
"at least one" and "one or more" to introduce claim elements.
However, the use of such phrases should not be construed to imply
that the introduction of a claim element by the indefinite articles
"a" or "an" limits any particular claim containing such introduced
claim element to inventions containing only one such element, even
when the same claim includes the introductory phrases "one or more"
or "at least one" and indefinite articles such as "a" or "an"; the
same holds true for the use in the claims of definite articles.
* * * * *